Amrish Deshmukh, Miki Yokokawa, Daniel McBride, Jamie Simpson, Andrew Chou, Michael Ghannam, Jackson J Liang, Mohammed Saeed, Ryan Cunnane, Hamid Ghanbari, Rakesh Latchamsetty, Thomas Crawford, Krit Jongnarangsin, Frank Pelosi, Aman Chugh, Fred Morady, Frank Bogun, Hakan Oral
{"title":"Dofetilide for the treatment of premature ventricular complexes and ventricular tachycardia in patients with structural heart disease.","authors":"Amrish Deshmukh, Miki Yokokawa, Daniel McBride, Jamie Simpson, Andrew Chou, Michael Ghannam, Jackson J Liang, Mohammed Saeed, Ryan Cunnane, Hamid Ghanbari, Rakesh Latchamsetty, Thomas Crawford, Krit Jongnarangsin, Frank Pelosi, Aman Chugh, Fred Morady, Frank Bogun, Hakan Oral","doi":"10.1111/jce.16452","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dofetilide is a class III antiarrhythmic agent approved for the treatment of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter. Given the efficacy of other class III agents, it has been used off-label for the treatment of premature ventricular complexes (PVCs) and ventricular tachycardias (VTs).</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of dofetilide for ventricular arrythmias (VAs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this retrospective cohort study, 81 patients (59 men; age = 60 ± 14 years; LVEF = 0.34 ± 0.16) were admitted for dofetilide initiation to treat PVCs (29), VTs (42) or both (10). A ≥ 80% decrease in PVC burden was defined as a satisfactory response. An ICD was present in 72 patients (89%). Another antiarrhythmic was previously used in 50 patients (62%). Prior catheter ablation had been performed in 33 patients (41%).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During intitiation, dofetilide was discontinued in 12 patients (15%) due to QT prolongation (8) and inefficacy to suppress VAs (4). Among the 32 patients with PVCs who successfully started dofetilide, the mean PVC burden decreased from 20 ± 10% to 8 ± 8% at a median follow-up of 2.6 months (p < .001). PVC burden was reduced by ≥80% in only 11/32 patients (34%). During 7 ± 1 years of follow-up, 41/69 patients (59%) continued to have VAs and received appropriate ICD therapies for monomorphic VTs (35) and polymorphic VT/VF (6) at a median of 8.0 (IQR 2.6-33.2) months. Dofetilide had to be discontinued in 50/69 patients (72%) due to inefficacy or intolerance. The composite outcome of VT/VF recurrence, heart transplantation, or death occurred in 6/12 patients (50%) without dofetilide and 49/69 patients (71%) with dofetilide. The event free survival was similar between patients treated with and without dofetilide (log-rank p = .55).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Treatment with dofetilide was associated with a decrease in PVCs, however clinically significant suppression occurred in a minority of patients. Dofetilide failed to suppress the occurrence of VTs in a majority of patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":15178,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jce.16452","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Dofetilide is a class III antiarrhythmic agent approved for the treatment of atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter. Given the efficacy of other class III agents, it has been used off-label for the treatment of premature ventricular complexes (PVCs) and ventricular tachycardias (VTs).
Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of dofetilide for ventricular arrythmias (VAs).
Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, 81 patients (59 men; age = 60 ± 14 years; LVEF = 0.34 ± 0.16) were admitted for dofetilide initiation to treat PVCs (29), VTs (42) or both (10). A ≥ 80% decrease in PVC burden was defined as a satisfactory response. An ICD was present in 72 patients (89%). Another antiarrhythmic was previously used in 50 patients (62%). Prior catheter ablation had been performed in 33 patients (41%).
Results: During intitiation, dofetilide was discontinued in 12 patients (15%) due to QT prolongation (8) and inefficacy to suppress VAs (4). Among the 32 patients with PVCs who successfully started dofetilide, the mean PVC burden decreased from 20 ± 10% to 8 ± 8% at a median follow-up of 2.6 months (p < .001). PVC burden was reduced by ≥80% in only 11/32 patients (34%). During 7 ± 1 years of follow-up, 41/69 patients (59%) continued to have VAs and received appropriate ICD therapies for monomorphic VTs (35) and polymorphic VT/VF (6) at a median of 8.0 (IQR 2.6-33.2) months. Dofetilide had to be discontinued in 50/69 patients (72%) due to inefficacy or intolerance. The composite outcome of VT/VF recurrence, heart transplantation, or death occurred in 6/12 patients (50%) without dofetilide and 49/69 patients (71%) with dofetilide. The event free survival was similar between patients treated with and without dofetilide (log-rank p = .55).
Conclusions: Treatment with dofetilide was associated with a decrease in PVCs, however clinically significant suppression occurred in a minority of patients. Dofetilide failed to suppress the occurrence of VTs in a majority of patients.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology (JCE) keeps its readership well informed of the latest developments in the study and management of arrhythmic disorders. Edited by Bradley P. Knight, M.D., and a distinguished international editorial board, JCE is the leading journal devoted to the study of the electrophysiology of the heart.